Criminal Defense Case Analysis
We all do our best to protect what is ours, but how far will we go to do that and will it justify our reasons behind our actions? Whether it’s protecting our properties and possessions, or family or even ourselves, situations get out of hand and we are faced with making decisions that could change our lives and the lives of those around us. The tiniest detail can determine ones actions as justifiable or unjustifiable. For Don Luis Ceballos and Judy-Ann Laws Norman their actions of defense were unjustifiable according to a jury.
Professor Joshua Dressler argues that the various legal standards for protection of the dwelling make little difference because in an age marked by fear of “home invasion” and violent crime, a jury will almost always find the use of deadly force is justified against an intruder (Lippman, 2010). In 1970, Mr. Ceballos was convicted by a jury of assault with a deadly weapon. In defense, Mr. Ceballos acted to protect his home and his property during his absence. In March of 1970, Mr. Ceballos, who lived alone noticed that several of his tools were missing from his garage where he sometimes sleeps. Two months later, Mr. Ceballos noticed his garage door locks were being tampered with as if someone was trying to pry them open. Taking action in “the defense of his home and property”, Mr. Ceballos decided to set up a trap gun in the garage in hopes of catching the person who was trying to rob him. He mounted a .22 caliber pistol to the shelf and attached a wire to the garage door so that when the door opens for just a few inches, the weapon would go discharge. There were two young teenage boys that had broken into his garage before and after assuring that no one was home they attempted it again. Stephen, 16 years old was the one to open the lock and lift the door to the garage. Unbeknownst to him that there was a deadly weapon aiming to go off...